From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754398AbdDFIhi (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Apr 2017 04:37:38 -0400 Received: from mx2.suse.de ([195.135.220.15]:34822 "EHLO mx2.suse.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754299AbdDFIh2 (ORCPT ); Thu, 6 Apr 2017 04:37:28 -0400 Subject: Re: [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback To: Julien Grall , Boris Ostrovsky , xen-devel@lists.xen.org References: <20170405181417.15985-1-julien.grall@arm.com> <3f6f5853-cd08-8afc-f71a-b0c1545c7564@arm.com> Cc: sstabellini@kernel.org, linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Daniel Kiper From: Juergen Gross Message-ID: Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 10:37:25 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <3f6f5853-cd08-8afc-f71a-b0c1545c7564@arm.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 06/04/17 10:32, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > On 06/04/17 07:23, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 05/04/17 21:49, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> On 04/05/2017 02:14 PM, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> The x86 code has theoritically a similar issue, altought EFI does not >>>> seem to be the preferred method. I have left it unimplemented on x86 >>>> and >>>> CCed Linux Xen x86 maintainers to know their view here. >>> >>> (+Daniel) >>> >>> This could be a problem for x86 as well, at least theoretically. >>> xen_machine_power_off() may call pm_power_off(), which is >>> efi.reset_system. >>> >>> So I think we should have a similar routine there. >> >> +1 >> >> I don't see any problem with such a routine added, in contrast to >> potential "reboots" instead of power off without it. >> >> So I think this dummy xen_efi_reset_system() should be added to >> drivers/xen/efi.c instead. > > I will resend the patch during day with xen_efi_reset_system moved to > common code and implement the x86 counterpart (thought, I will not be > able to test it). I'm rather sure it isn't hit very often. Otherwise there would be more complaints about crashes during power off (in fact I do remember several occasions where somebody claimed power off seemed to do a reboot only). Juergen >> >>>> This should also probably be fixed in stable tree. >> >> Yes. > > I will CC stable. > > Thank you, > From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jgross@suse.com (Juergen Gross) Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 10:37:25 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] arm64: xen: Implement EFI reset_system callback In-Reply-To: <3f6f5853-cd08-8afc-f71a-b0c1545c7564@arm.com> References: <20170405181417.15985-1-julien.grall@arm.com> <3f6f5853-cd08-8afc-f71a-b0c1545c7564@arm.com> Message-ID: To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On 06/04/17 10:32, Julien Grall wrote: > Hi Juergen, > > On 06/04/17 07:23, Juergen Gross wrote: >> On 05/04/17 21:49, Boris Ostrovsky wrote: >>> On 04/05/2017 02:14 PM, Julien Grall wrote: >>>> The x86 code has theoritically a similar issue, altought EFI does not >>>> seem to be the preferred method. I have left it unimplemented on x86 >>>> and >>>> CCed Linux Xen x86 maintainers to know their view here. >>> >>> (+Daniel) >>> >>> This could be a problem for x86 as well, at least theoretically. >>> xen_machine_power_off() may call pm_power_off(), which is >>> efi.reset_system. >>> >>> So I think we should have a similar routine there. >> >> +1 >> >> I don't see any problem with such a routine added, in contrast to >> potential "reboots" instead of power off without it. >> >> So I think this dummy xen_efi_reset_system() should be added to >> drivers/xen/efi.c instead. > > I will resend the patch during day with xen_efi_reset_system moved to > common code and implement the x86 counterpart (thought, I will not be > able to test it). I'm rather sure it isn't hit very often. Otherwise there would be more complaints about crashes during power off (in fact I do remember several occasions where somebody claimed power off seemed to do a reboot only). Juergen >> >>>> This should also probably be fixed in stable tree. >> >> Yes. > > I will CC stable. > > Thank you, >